(25-10-2011 03:48 PM)defacto7 Wrote: The post to me sounded like a jab at us for being old and frivolous.

Oh no, not at all, I was quite serious in saying that it seems to be a human trait to consider the past better than the present. If you look at mythology all over the world, I can't think of a single culture that believes we come from some ancient past of misery and suffering, and that things have got better since then. They all seem to be a variation of the Garden of Eden, a time of innocence, closeness to god(gods), prosperity, etc then something happens that ruins it all. I find this fascinating because I can't explain it. Why would the human mind have this propensity? Even now that we can actually quantify things like crime rates, life span, literacy, child mortality, etc, you still hear people shaking their heads at how dark and terrible our times have become. It seems this propensity is stronger than reason. This is all I was trying to say, and it wasn't supposed to mock anybody.

English is not my first language. If you think I am being mean, ask me. It could be just a wording problem.

I understand, and thank you. Your ideas a well thought out. I will try my best to keep evaluating whether I have a reasonable view of how man has progressed in regard to violence.

If I see a dangerous difference that is more prominent in the present, it's the fact that extreme ideologies in small numbers can do massive harm. Mass violence in the past was a slower process and local. Everything was local. Now, how we think, act, what we believe and how we go about perusing our beliefs and ideals is global. This can be for the common good, or it can mean annihilation. Things are no longer local and it effects us all very quickly. The idea of safer or less violent takes on a whole different meaning. So the data can be misleading.

I understand, and thank you. Your ideas a well thought out. I will try my best to keep evaluating whether I have a reasonable view of how man has progressed in regard to violence.

If I see a dangerous difference that is more prominent in the present, it's the fact that extreme ideologies in small numbers can do massive harm. Mass violence in the past was a slower process and local. Everything was local. Now, how we think, act, what we believe and how we go about perusing our beliefs and ideals is global. This can be for the common good, or it can mean annihilation. Things are no longer local and it effects us all very quickly. The idea of safer or less violent takes on a whole different meaning. So the data can be misleading.

While it's easy for us now to look at, say, fundamentalist Muslim terrorism and feel its extremism is something terrible and menacing (which it is, by the way) compare it to for example the Inquisition. which lasted for several centuries in all the Western world, and sent countless innocent people to torture and death. And while fundamentalist Muslim terrorists are a minority, the Inquisition was institutionalized, and widely supported by the general population's superstition and religious beliefs!

But I have to agree with you on the point that now if we have wars, they assume global scales, and also that the kind of weapons we have today are infinitely more destructive than those of the past. Only in modern times have we come close to total annihilation.

English is not my first language. If you think I am being mean, ask me. It could be just a wording problem.

(26-10-2011 11:35 AM)sy2502 Wrote: While it's easy for us now to look at, say, fundamentalist Muslim terrorism and feel its extremism is something terrible and menacing (which it is, by the way) compare it to for example the Inquisition.

Agreed. I see Muslim extremism as only a part of the problem we are faced with today. Your injection of the Inquisition into this context can be almost futuristic. There is a political force in the western countries that is alarming and devastating to the progress of humanity. It's fundamentalism; not just Muslim, Christian or Jewish but religious fundamentalism of any kind. In it's lesser form it stunts growth and progress of science and knowledge. In it's more hateful forms it could cause an inquisition of it's own on a massive (though less personal or local) scale. If Christian fundamentalism becomes the power center in the US, it will not be a peaceful, gentle or negotiable position. The presidency of George W. Bush and it's aftermath could pale by comparison.

This could be why thinking of the past as more violent and the present as measurably more peaceful could give an impression that it's time to relax and not worry too much about the noisy voices of discontent; it could give the impression that we have arrived at some safer point in history. The seeds of the Inquisition are only laying dormant in the earth, but they are alive and ready to sprout.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Where I work I get a daily report on world wide safety and security warnings.
What you see in the nightly news or even get off the web might be 10% of what is going on out there.
It’s not a safe cuddly happy place.
We get health updates too…
Also not good.

I do wonder though, is it a case of the oppressed being a little more subdued of late due to the increased difficulty of just putting food on the table as the world credit crunch reaches further afield?
Or is it because the local forces on both sides of the fence have scaled back operations due to the drop in outside funding?
Or is it a mix of both?

It has been observed that during economic down times the road toll drops, less cash and you don’t drive to the beach just for fun.
Could it be the same on a larger scale?

Whatever the cause it can not, and will not last.
Those who have the upper hand at the moment will relax and those who are licking their wounds will get restless again.
Take Egypt for example, got rid of the guy in charge and it should all settle down and be a better place right?
But the power vacuum needs to be filled and there will be winners and losers regardless on who gets to fill it.
And in a country where you have two warring religious factions?

Even in a country of one major religion there will be those that light fires.
Protestants vs. Catholics ring any bells?
So if the Christians get power in the US, will the Muslims, Jews and Buddhists have to toe the line?
Or will they jump right into Christian group A wanting X while group B want Y?
Religion in politics, oh yay…

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. Friedrich Nietzsche

(27-10-2011 07:04 AM)Karl Wrote: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Where I work I get a daily report on world wide safety and security warnings.
What you see in the nightly news or even get off the web might be 10% of what is going on out there.
It’s not a safe cuddly happy place.

You are asking us to trust you, with all due respect a stranger in Internet, versus the national crime statistics, which you are calling "lies" without giving any support to your accusation. Some pretty hefty expectations on your part.

English is not my first language. If you think I am being mean, ask me. It could be just a wording problem.

(27-10-2011 07:04 AM)Karl Wrote: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Where I work I get a daily report on world wide safety and security warnings.
What you see in the nightly news or even get off the web might be 10% of what is going on out there.
It’s not a safe cuddly happy place.

You are asking us to trust you, with all due respect a stranger in Internet, versus the national crime statistics, which you are calling "lies" without giving any support to your accusation. Some pretty hefty expectations on your part.

Fair enough…
I work for International SOS and we are a worldwide rescue organisation who often look after those who need or wish to travel to the more undesirable parts of the world.
So we have constant updates with what’s happening and where via local and outside sources.
That and cynicism on my part make me look very hard at any “gift hose”
As for the lies, damn lies part…

The term was popularized in the United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the 19th-century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881): "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." However, the phrase is not found in any of Disraeli's works and the earliest known appearances were years after his death. Other coiners have therefore been proposed.
Thank you Wikipedia.

Your suspicion is commendable, if we didn’t question we would never know.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. Friedrich Nietzsche

A problem with my reply, I could say I work on Mars and that I’m Super Karl defender of the masses and it may not be entirely true.
Sorry, I have no proof that I am who I say I am and there is little to do to change that.
A matter of faith?

Oh the irony…

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. Friedrich Nietzsche

The article tries to point out things that have changed..........and things have changed..........but have they changed for the better or worse???

Trying to compare statistics from years ago to statistics from now is like trying to match the spec of a first genre Volkswagon to a more recent model.....things may be completly different....a little bit safer...... but they can still kill you.

We are constantly evolving from the changes we place upon ourselves......if I look back 100 hundred years ago compared to today I would say the state of the earth would be a good indicator if things have "progressed".........(checks history)........well that was depressing to say the least

I feel so much, and yet I feel nothing.
I am a rock, I am the sky, the birds and the trees and everything beyond.
I am the wind, in the fields in which I roar. I am the water, in which I drown.